Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That may be true if you want to create such a union tomorrow but I'm thinking more down the line. Given the rapid economic progress Estonia has made since 1991, there is no reason to believe Estonia cannot catch up with the other Nordic countries (or even surpass them) in the not-too-distant future. As for their current economic policies, this is also not something that is set in stone. Membership of the Nordic Union would give them other opportunities to remain economically competitive so they might not be as uncompromising about this as you think. Besides, Estonians prefer to align themselves with the Nordic countries rather than Russia so even if membership to the NU comes at an economic cost for them, they might be willing to accept this.
As for population, Estonia has more inhabitants than Iceland, Greenland, the Faroe Islands and the Ã…land Islands combined so I don't see the problem there. This comparitive disadvantage in terms of population did not prevent Estonia from joining the European Union or the Eurozone so I doubt this will be a major obstacle for them.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to have Estonia join this hypothetical new country, it just makes more sense to me than including very remote places like Iceland or Greenland. In my opinion, a union of just Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark would be the most practical and realistic.
You are thinking about a future thing that might happen in 40-50 years. Yes, the economic progress of Estonia has been rapid, but it's still miles away. An overtake is possible, but not before you have got your first grey hairs. Speculating far into the future has so many uncertain possibilities, so I don't think it's very realistic to debate that further. The five of us can start negotiating tomorrow, Estonia can't.
And if Estonia would be accepted, why shouldn't Latvia and Lithuania? And that would take the whole "Kalmar Union II" idea away. If you would be for a united Benelux, would it seem the same if Portugal and Slovakia would join suddenly? No. I think the nationalistic sentiment asking "why" and the sense of being different from "them" would be way too strong. The whole idea would crumble apart. Regarding already Estonia that could happen.
Iceland is a natural choice, as they have been a full member of the Nordic Council since the start in 1952, and been integrally cooperating since. Greenland, Faroes and Ã…land are not full members, but self-governing autonomous territories with their own identities. Nothing would change in their reality, so long as somebody gives a bit of money to them so they can play in their small sandpits. I don't even know if they even care.
For population, if Estonia would be given the right to council housing and welfare in the other nations, Estonia would have 1000 people tomorrow. Try building a country from that. And not because Estonians are stupid or lazy, but because it's economically wise. Think, unemployment subsidies in Finland are higher than the average wage in Estonia. What would you do as an Estonian?
You are thinking about a future thing that might happen in 40-50 years. Yes, the economic progress of Estonia has been rapid, but it's still miles away. An overtake is possible, but not before you have got your first grey hairs. Speculating far into the future has so many uncertain possibilities, so I don't think it's very realistic to debate that further. The five of us can start negotiating tomorrow, Estonia can't.
I really do not think it will take half a century for Estonia to catch up to Finland. If they keep progressing at the same pace they have for the past two decades, it will be more like 15-20 years. Some are even more optimistic:
Quote:
Nevertheless, long-term prospects for the Estonian economy remain among the most promising in Europe. In 2011, the real GDP growth in Estonia was 8.0%, and according to the projections made by the CEPII, by 2025 the GDP per capita could rise to the level of Nordic economies of Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Norway.
To be honest, I don't think a Nordic Union is very realistic in the first place given all the issues I've mentioned before (monarchy vs. republic, EU membership, nationalism, etc.) so this is all just hypothetically speaking.
Quote:
And if Estonia would be accepted, why shouldn't Latvia and Lithuania? And that would take the whole "Kalmar Union II" idea away. If you would be for a united Benelux, would it seem the same if Portugal and Slovakia would join suddenly? No. I think the nationalistic sentiment asking "why" and the sense of being different from "them" would be way too strong. The whole idea would crumble apart. Regarding already Estonia that could happen.
Scandinavia and Estonia have a much closer relationship than the Benelux and Slovakia/Portugal. Estonia shares a maritime border with Finland and Sweden, it had been under Danish and Swedish rule for several centuries and it is a major trade partner for Scandinavia (Sweden and Finland account for a third of Estonia's exports and imports). Why then do you as a Finnish person try to distance yourself from Estonia and pretend they're as foreign to Scandinavia as Slovakia would be to the Netherlands?
The main reason I didn't include Latvia and Lithuania is that they're not as advanced as Estonia (both in terms of development and economics) and their trade is far less intertwined with Scandinavia. They're also not as close to Scandinavia from a historical, cultural or geographic perspective.
Quote:
Iceland is a natural choice, as they have been a full member of the Nordic Council since the start in 1952, and been integrally cooperating since. Greenland, Faroes and Ã…land are not full members, but self-governing autonomous territories with their own identities. Nothing would change in their reality, so long as somebody gives a bit of money to them so they can play in their small sandpits. I don't even know if they even care.
But Iceland with a population of just 325,000 would be at a far greater comparitive disadvantage in a Nordic Union than Estonia would be, and yet you used population as an argument against Estonian membership. Iceland is also 1000 km removed from mainland Scandinavia and it is far less economically dependent on Scandinavia as Estonia is (Norway is only its 5th major export partner at 4%, behind the Netherlands, Germany, UK and US). What incentive does Iceland have to join the Nordic Union?
Quote:
For population, if Estonia would be given the right to council housing and welfare in the other nations, Estonia would have 1000 people tomorrow. Try building a country from that. And not because Estonians are stupid or lazy, but because it's economically wise. Think, unemployment subsidies in Finland are higher than the average wage in Estonia. What would you do as an Estonian?
Estonia is already a member of the EU and Schengen so people are free to travel and work in other EU Member States (such as Finland). But that is not the point. You are still talking from a position where the standard of living in Estonia is far below the rest of Scandinavia even though it is one of the fastest growing economies in Europe. If a Nordic Union were to be established 10 years from now, I highly doubt Estonians would leave their country in droves in search of greener pastures.
I do not look down on Estonia in any way, but Iceland is despite the geographical location far, far more Scandinavian in all aspects, just like the Faroe Islands. Greenland though is completely different and culturally not Scandinavian at all, but rather Canadian Inuit.
I really do not think it will take half a century for Estonia to catch up to Finland. If they keep progressing at the same pace they have for the past two decades, it will be more like 15-20 years. Some are even more optimistic:
And last year the growth was down to 3%, this year's prediction is 1.2%. Those kind of long-term predictions are often overoptimistic.
Quote:
To be honest, I don't think a Nordic Union is very realistic in the first place given all the issues I've mentioned before (monarchy vs. republic, EU membership, nationalism, etc.) so this is all just hypothetically speaking.
Of course it's not. Most likely it would be a republican constitution, I think the people would choose it instead of your king or our king. Nationalism yes, but as a survey had stated that 40% of all Nordics looks at a union in a even somewhat positive way, it's still more realistic than many other hypothetical uniting of nations. We have had a common job market and passport-free zone since 1952, and universal healthcare/social security since the 1960's, and especially before the EU we had a lot of Nordic cooperation. For example we have had a common energy market for decades. The history is already there, and that is quite unique in Europe as it has gone on for so long.
Quote:
Scandinavia and Estonia have a much closer relationship than the Benelux and Slovakia/Portugal. Estonia shares a maritime border with Finland and Sweden, it had been under Danish and Swedish rule for several centuries and it is a major trade partner for Scandinavia (Sweden and Finland account for a third of Estonia's exports and imports). Why then do you as a Finnish person try to distance yourself from Estonia and pretend they're as foreign to Scandinavia as Slovakia would be to the Netherlands?
I'm not distancing me from Estonia, but I'm distancing myself from Latvia and Lithuania, which would in theory have the same "right" to join than Estonia in a scenario like this. OTH Denmark and Norway are certainly distancing themselves from Estonia, because they have really nothing to do with each other. Danish Estonia is older than New Amsterdam, and I doubt they have really much Dutch left in New York, except for some street signs. Swedish Estonian was only a colony, not an integral part of the kingdom like Finland, and therefore the Swedish influence was also small. I've had Danish people asking me about Estonians "are they more like us or Russians". There just isn't a connection. Therefore I mentioned Portugal.
I honestly also believe that Estonia would benefit more themselves if the trade with Finland and Sweden, if it was foreign trade and not domestic, as now they can play with their own rules. In the Nordic Union it would be impossible, as the trade unions would fall over the companies like a ton of bricks.
Quote:
The main reason I didn't include Latvia and Lithuania is that they're not as advanced as Estonia (both in terms of development and economics) and their trade is far less intertwined with Scandinavia. They're also not as close to Scandinavia from a historical, cultural or geographic perspective.
Geographic perspective? Latvia is as close to Sweden as Estonia. And why should Estonia be included, but Latvia and Lithuania not in this case? You can't have favourites.
Quote:
But Iceland with a population of just 325,000 would be at a far greater comparitive disadvantage in a Nordic Union than Estonia would be, and yet you used population as an argument against Estonian membership. Iceland is also 1000 km removed from mainland Scandinavia and it is far less economically dependent on Scandinavia as Estonia is (Norway is only its 5th major export partner at 4%, behind the Netherlands, Germany, UK and US). What incentive does Iceland have to join the Nordic Union?
If Iceland don't want to join, fine, it's up to them to decide. I used population as one disadvantage, as Estonia would be the newcomer, while Finland, Denmark and Norway have all the same population, and politically roughly the same strength. Sweden is a bit stronger, but Estonia a lot weaker. It's like if the EPP would only have Germany, France, Italy, UK and the Netherlands. How big a voice would you guys have to reach your goals?
Quote:
Estonia is already a member of the EU and Schengen so people are free to travel and work in other EU Member States (such as Finland). But that is not the point. You are still talking from a position where the standard of living in Estonia is far below the rest of Scandinavia even though it is one of the fastest growing economies in Europe. If a Nordic Union were to be established 10 years from now, I highly doubt Estonians would leave their country in droves in search of greener pastures.
Free to travel and free to work within the EU is not the same as right to housing or welfare. As one country, people couldn't anymore be denied this. There are 60k Estonians living here and up to 200k working at least for part of the year, because of the stark differences in salaries. And that's a lot for a nation of 1.5 million. I am talking about lower standard of living in Estonia, because it's true. Their growth has been fast and all respect to Estonia, but as of today, they are still far away. 10 years won't do it, as Finland's economy is not stagnant either. Oh wait, it is, but it will not be forever. Anyway, I think Denmark and Norway would vote no to Estonia.
I also think the country name should have Nordic in it rather than Scandinavia. Nordic State, Nordic Union, United Nordics, something like that. I also believe it makes much more sense to have Estonia in such a union than geographically remote Iceland or Greenland.
According to the UN the British Isles are northern Europe. The word Nordic was coined about 100 years ago to groups northern European countries. This proposed country of, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is the official UN definition of northern Europe with only the British Isles omitted. So calling it Nordic is out.
Anyway, why would Iceland want to be involved? They are very remote and have strong links with Norway and the UK. They have no connection whatsoever with people living very near to St. Petersburg.
Free to travel and free to work within the EU is not the same as right to housing or welfare. As one country, people couldn't anymore be denied this. There are 60k Estonians living here and up to 200k working at least for part of the year, because of the stark differences in salaries. And that's a lot for a nation of 1.5 million. I am talking about lower standard of living in Estonia, because it's true. Their growth has been fast and all respect to Estonia, but as of today, they are still far away. 10 years won't do it, as Finland's economy is not stagnant either. Oh wait, it is, but it will not be forever. Anyway, I think Denmark and Norway would vote no to Estonia.
What exactly do you mean by a "lower standart of living" ? Comparison between wages doesn't really work because there are differences between the costs of living in each country. I'm sure you are aware of that. Now, if the prices in Estonia were as high as in Finland, one could say Finland can provide a "higher standart" of life, but it's not like that. Some places in Europe are up to 6 times cheaper than Finland, not to mention Norway or Denmark. A lot of people from countries like Estonia work for few years abroad and then return home, because their earned moncey would be much more worth in their native country.
What exactly do you mean by a "lower standart of living" ? Comparison between wages doesn't really work because there are differences between the costs of living in each country. I'm sure you are aware of that. Now, if the prices in Estonia were as high as in Finland, one could say Finland can provide a "higher standart" of life, but it's not like that. Some places in Europe are up to 6 times cheaper than Finland, not to mention Norway or Denmark. A lot of people from countries like Estonia work for few years abroad and then return home, because their earned moncey would be much more worth in their native country.
Eh? Philips make a TV somewhere in China and it costs €100 for them after all expenses. They sell it for €200. A Finn makes €2500 a month, an Estonian €850 a month. The Finn pays €1000 in rent, the Estonian €300. Who can buy the TV faster? That is standard of living.
BTW, the prices in Tallinn were saturated already around 2000, as so many Finns came there and bought cheap things, and now the prices for clothing for example are almost at the same level as in Finland. The rents and groceries are cheaper, but now I have no reason anymore to go there and buy clothing, for example.
Your reasoning works only if all countries would be 100% self-sufficient.
Eh? Philips make a TV somewhere in China and it costs €100 for them after all expenses. They sell it for €200. A Finn makes €2500 a month, an Estonian €850 a month. The Finn pays €1000 in rent, the Estonian €300. Who can buy the TV faster? That is standard of living.
BTW, the prices in Tallinn were saturated already around 2000, as so many Finns came there and bought cheap things, and now the prices for clothing for example are almost at the same level as in Finland. The rents and groceries are cheaper, but now I have no reason anymore to go there and buy clothing, for example.
Your reasoning works only if all countries would be 100% self-sufficient.
300 seems fine for Estonia, but don't forget that a lot of people from other parts of east Europe don't pay rent, because they own their houses/apartments. I personally don't know anyone who rents a place. Of course most countries aren't fully self sufficient, but there are a number of companies that are targeted towards lower income countries and sell their products only there.
My point is, we have cheaper alternatives, you don't (or at least not THAT cheap), so you are forced to pay more than us. Unless of course you manage to find that Ukrainian bread I bought for 25 cents lol. I don't know if you can buy anything for 25 cents in Finland.
And last year the growth was down to 3%, this year's prediction is 1.2%. Those kind of long-term predictions are often overoptimistic.
And what was Finland's growth rate in that same time period?* Estonia does not need to grow at a steady pace of 8% each year to catch up, it just needs to grow faster than the other countries in the Union. I agree that 2025 seems somewhat optimistic but I have no doubt that Estonia will continue to narrow the gap with the countries to its north and west in the coming years. All of Europe is still recovering from the economic crisis so it isn't really fair to use last year's growth rate as representative for the next decade.
*In case you're curious: Finland's growth rate for last year was -1.4% (source) and its projection for this year is 0.2% (source).
Quote:
Of course it's not. Most likely it would be a republican constitution, I think the people would choose it instead of your king or our king. Nationalism yes, but as a survey had stated that 40% of all Nordics looks at a union in a even somewhat positive way, it's still more realistic than many other hypothetical uniting of nations. We have had a common job market and passport-free zone since 1952, and universal healthcare/social security since the 1960's, and especially before the EU we had a lot of Nordic cooperation. For example we have had a common energy market for decades. The history is already there, and that is quite unique in Europe as it has gone on for so long.
I do not believe most Norwegians, Danes or Swedes would choose a republic over a constitutional monarchy. Based on recent polls, 82% of Norwegians support the monarchy over a republic (source), compared to 70% of Swedes (source) and 84% of Danes (source).
We need more than one survey to determine how Scandinavians really feel about eroding their national borders and sharing their resources. Given Norway and Iceland's resistance to the EU I doubt they would be willing to give up their sovereignty that easily. And do Danes really feel so close to Finland (and vice versa) that they would want to be part of the same country?
Quote:
Geographic perspective? Latvia is as close to Sweden as Estonia. And why should Estonia be included, but Latvia and Lithuania not in this case? You can't have favourites.
But it's not as close to Finland. All that separates Finland from Estonia is the narrow Gulf of Finland.
I also mentioned other reasons for why Estonia should be included over Latvia and Lithuania, such as economic/developmental advancement and trade relations with Scandinavia.
Quote:
If Iceland don't want to join, fine, it's up to them to decide. I used population as one disadvantage, as Estonia would be the newcomer, while Finland, Denmark and Norway have all the same population, and politically roughly the same strength. Sweden is a bit stronger, but Estonia a lot weaker. It's like if the EPP would only have Germany, France, Italy, UK and the Netherlands. How big a voice would you guys have to reach your goals?
But the Nordic Union would be an actual country rather than an organisation of Member States that have to bargain and defend their national interests. Therefore, your comparison to the EPP does not make sense. If there is no "national" solidarity between the constituent parts of the Nordic Union, what is the point of creating a country in the first place? If politics in the Nordic Union continues to be a competition between "us" versus "them", it will fall apart at the slightest adversity.
Quote:
Free to travel and free to work within the EU is not the same as right to housing or welfare. As one country, people couldn't anymore be denied this. There are 60k Estonians living here and up to 200k working at least for part of the year, because of the stark differences in salaries. And that's a lot for a nation of 1.5 million. I am talking about lower standard of living in Estonia, because it's true. Their growth has been fast and all respect to Estonia, but as of today, they are still far away. 10 years won't do it, as Finland's economy is not stagnant either. Oh wait, it is, but it will not be forever. Anyway, I think Denmark and Norway would vote no to Estonia.
Again, you are considering Estonia's current position while I'm talking about an Estonia that has roughly the same standard of living as the other Nordic countries.
Just to be clear: I do not think including Estonia in the Nordic Union would be a particularly wise idea. My original response merely said that it makes more sense to me than geographically remote places like Iceland or Greenland.
Last edited by LindavG; 11-06-2014 at 02:13 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
